Neutral opinion needed on east/west
So fellas the latest judgement is in and I am curious to see how you neutral guys intrepet what the judge said(usapa reads it as a huge victory and so does the west) So if you have a second, read this order and let us know what you think it means.
AWAPPA Members Forum PS If you don't care to read it, don't and save your bandwith. |
In the spirit of true neutrality, I couldn't log on to the website to read the verdict. Should I pull a "congress" and give you an opinion prior to knowing what it says? Two things you should know about bipartisan me; I invented the internet and I can see Russia from my back porch.
|
I read it as the ball is the judgement, the ice cream is the NIC and the guy is the west pilot group.
http://i.imgur.com/cvAkg.gif I thought she would overturn the 9th to be honest. You guys will probably get the NIC in the AMR merger anyways. If you guys don't merge, I can see you giving up a little of the windfall to the east. |
Sorry I thought that was not locked, let me see if I can find a good link
|
I'm sure cactuspilot.com will have it up soon. I have had some issues with the pieces they write, but have to hand it to them for keeping everyone informed.
You asked for neutral opinions so I won't respond except to ask....why? We have a neutral answer, and really the only one that counts. Here's the short version, but the long version has some interesting wording when you can read it: Pursuant to the Court’s resolution of the motions for summary judgment, IT IS ORDERED Counts I and III of the complaint are dismissed and judgment is entered in favor of US Airline Pilots Association on Count II of the complaint. US Airline Pilots Association’s seniority proposal does not breach its duty of fair representation provided it is supported by a legitimate union purpose. DATED this 11th day of October, 2012. |
Actually usapa won because the judge reversed herself and dismissed the case, a case she said she would rule on.
However she did include some things in the dismissal that are very interesting. |
Originally Posted by cactiboss
(Post 1275688)
However she did include some things in the dismissal that are very interesting.
|
So did she just rule that USAPA is free to do a DOH list?
|
Here are some of the crucial points she made:
When USAPA became the pilots’ new collective bargaining representative, it succeeded “to the status of the former representative without alteration in the contract terms.” Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters v. Texas Int’l Airlines, Inc., 717 F.2d 157, 163 (5th Cir. 1983). As there does not appear to be any dispute that the Transition Agreement was part of the contract between the pilots and US Airways, the Transition Agreement applies to USAPA. Even the case which USAPA relies upon states there is a “general principle that collective bargaining agreements survive a change in representative.” Ass’n of Flight Attendants, AFL-CIO v. USAir, Inc., 24 F.3d 1432, 1439 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Thus, just as ALPA would have been bound by the Transition Agreement had it remained the pilots’ representative, USAPA is bound by the Transition Agreement.2 More: Of course, in negotiating for a particular seniority regime, USAPA must not breach its duty of fair representation. Accordingly, if USAPA wishes to abandon the Nicolau Award and accept the consequences of this course of action, it is free to do so. By discarding the result of a valid arbitration and negotiating for a different seniority regime, USAPA is running the risk that it will be sued by the disadvantaged pilots when the new collective bargaining agreement is finalized. An impartial arbitrator’s decision regarding an appropriate method of seniority integration is powerful evidence of a fair result. Discarding the Nicolau Award places USAPA on dangerous ground and for the company's benefit she wrote: This conclusion places US Airways in a difficult position. At the present time, it is not possible to predict what will result from the collective bargaining negotiations. Thus, the Court cannot grant US Airways prospective immunity from any legal action by the West Pilots. But based on the representation at oral argument that the seniority list is unlike other matters addressed in collective bargaining, it is unlikely the West Pilots could successfully allege claims against US Airways merely for not insisting that USAPA continue to advocate for the Nicolau Award. See Davenport v. Int’l Broth. of Teamsters, AFL-CIO, 166 F.3d 356, 361-62 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (addressing, without deciding, “the proper standard for determining whether an employer can be implicated in a union’s breach of duty”). |
It sounds like USAPA is free to go for a new list, but everyone is free to sue if they do so.
The more things change, the more they stay the same... I stand by my 2020 or AA merger prediction. :) |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:35 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands